Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina have all had their share of Republican debates. The poll ballots have been counted and each state picked a different winner as their choice for the Republican nominee. Some say these debates are splitting the vote too many ways as the process continues. Many are also saying the constant barrage of negative ad campaigns will tarnish the remaining candidates too greatly to gather enough support, but this is nothing compared to the onslaught which will be brought down on the Republican candidate who faces Obama in November. Your candidate needs to be prepared and these debates are helping him; whoever he is…including Ron Paul.

Now with the field narrowed; I’m sure you are beginning to rally behind “your” candidate. What will you do if “your” candidate drops out of the race? Many have ended their runs for president, leaving three strong candidates and Ron Paul. Many of the early drop outs in the process did so because of various pressures brought on by debate performance, poll results, campaign support or personal scandals. It seemed every week there was a new front-runner. This was a necessary process to help get the quality candidates we have today.

DO NOT RELY ON THE HIGHLIGHT REELS

The debates should be reviewed in their entirety in order to reveal which candidate you feel works best under pressure. This is a primary skill of the candidate who will perform best against Obama. One thing I hear often is only one candidate will beat Obama. That is not true. Anyone can beat Obama. We are in a far worse state since Obama became president. Even today, Obama blames anything but himself for the country’s continued economic decline. Obama’s Stimulus Plan has sunk this country into more debt quicker than any other president in history. Obama’s poor performance as a leader and the far-reaching polices which expand the tentacles of government into our lives need to stop if we want our children to have the same opportunities to succeed as we do. I could run against Obama with that kind of performance and I won’t need a teleprompter.

DON’T COUNT ON FLORIDA

Florida is just another step in the process just like South Carolina, New Hampshire and Iowa. Florida is not the best at reliable ballot counting practices either. Whichever candidate wins Florida will gain momentum until something else is brought to our attention by the media or the Democratic Party. We have to take these hits in stride. See how your candidate responds to criticism. See how your candidate handles pressure. One of the best performances I have seen to date was the exchange between John King and Newt Gingrich in South Carolina as John tried to throw Gingrich a curve ball by asking about a recent interview with his ex-wife. The response was priceless: Gingrich stood his ground confidently and did not show any sign of nervousness or backpedalling as he spoke. It is examples like these which you need to look for in your candidate

KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE PRIZE

Remember what you and every other independent and Republican wants to do: beat Obama. Four more years of Obama will mean further borrowing without spending cuts, a smaller military force, full implementation of “Obama Care” and more government regulation of our lives. We are still a country of individuals who all have the opportunity to succeed. We cannot forget that and we must fight in order to keep it. If your candidate does not end up being the nominee to face Obama in November, know that any of the candidates would bury Obama in a debate; even Ron Paul.

    There is scant mention as to policies, only to state a supposed general truth about something based on limited or incomplete evidence on another candidate.   It is time they came clean leaving the bickering outside, giving the electorate something to base their vote upon.    Do they have any clear policies concerning taxes, unemployment and health issues?   On the other hand, are all the candidates immune from any kind of real work, preferring to bluster their way to the White house? 

    No matter who actually becomes the party candidate, it is doubtful any of them have the intelligence required to lead the United States.   This only leaves one option open to those who sit on the fence, it has to be President Obama once again for another term.    Do the American people want this, as this is what will happen unless the Republican Party become organized.

   ”Americans don’t want someone to manage Washington.    They want someone to fundamentally change Washington and create a vision of where America is going.    We need someone who will inspire us, create a vision for us, and motivate the American public to do its duty.”  Said Republican presidential contender Rick Santorum.    Is he the man for the job? – If he is then now is the time to prove it.

     Forget all this infighting; give the American people what they really want.   Someone they can believe in that will work for America, and most importantly not for himself or herself as seems the case now.    Big business might have fingers in their pockets, but the American people should be in their minds and hearts.

Religion and science have overlapping conflicts that make it fairly safe to say that only one can be the truth. Science is all about the unknown. The unknown of the universe is what continuously alters what philosophers claim is the root of all creation and nature. But, one has to take note of the fact that the philosophies of the earliest men were flawed and sometimes altogether wrong. Claudius Ptolemaeus, or Ptolemy, a Greek scientist, used astrological knowledge to concoct a theory of how the universe operated. He created a model that showed how the universe revolved around the Earth, rather than the sun. This model was widely respected by the religions of that time, and it wasn’t until astronomers such as Galileo Galilei proved this theory wrong that the true structure was known. This shows how science, although supposedly based on fact, can be proven wrong at times and must change its theories. 

In addition to the falsehood of the philosophies of many scientists, they blatantly refute the basis of a God who created the world. This being the utmost important aspect of any faith sets the conflict at a standstill. Al-Ghazali, a well-known scientist, excelled in the teachings from Aristotle and Socrates, but then attacked them in his work The Incoherence of the Philosophers. Al-Ghazali observed how scientists believed there was no God and that there is no reason to live by any religious text: “They have abandoned all the religious duties Islam imposes on it followers. They laugh at the positive commandments of religion which enjoin the performance of acts of devotion and the absence from forbidden things”.

In the original text of Novum Organum, Francis Bacon challenges the works of Aristotle. Bacon starts his legacy as one of the first advocates of science based on experimentation. Earlier methods of science were all about logical deduction and reasoning rather than observation and actual testing. These early methods were sometimes based on principles from the Bible and Bacon believed this made them all false. Bacon therefore reinforces how scientific reasoning is ever-changing and that it is constantly proven wrong: “The art of logic, therefore, being (as we have mentioned), too late a precaution, and in no way remedying the matter, has tended more to confirm errors, than to disclose truth”.

In addition to Francis Bacon disputing the past works of Aristotle, Averroes does the same with Al-Ghazali in his work “On the Harmony of Religions and Philosophy”. Although religion and science have many differences and subjects too opposite for both to be considered true Averroes points out selections in the Quran to compare the two. But, rather than debate on the main points such as how the earth was created, Averroes centers his points on how scientific reasoning must be used to fully understand religion: “Now, it being established that the Law makes the observation and consideration of creation by reason obligatory–and consideration is nothing but to make explicit the implicit–this can only be done through reason. Thus we must look into creation with the reason”. Averroes attempted to get philosophy back into the Islamic world but failed because the people of Islam still rejected many viewpoints of science.

Ever since religion and science were created they have been debated. This is because of the overlapping areas that make both parties either right or wrong and the nonstop change of scientific views. Some may protest that science and religion, due to some texts may be able to coexist, but this is because they do not relate to the main topics of the two subjects. Scientists do not believe in the ways that religion states that the Earth was created and this is one of the main aspects of the religious faith. The way that science is constantly evolving makes it impossible to coincide with something that has stayed the same for thousands and thousands of years.

Image by The Library of Congress via Flickr

Image via Wikipedia

I am tired of people blaming the politicians. I will keep elected officials feet to the fire. However, I know that in a democracy, the voter has the power.

Barack Hussein Obama did not elect himself. He was helped by 62 million Americans, some of which call themselves conservatives.

A man with no experience, no education, poor values, and poor moral character is now president of the United States of America. We all saw the democrats and Obama try every unscrupulous tactic to get Obama-care passed in the US congress. Obama in my opinion is a sleazy little politician, willing to say and do anything to get elected.

This is the same opinion I have of Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich. Today, I spent the whole day listening to Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, and Shaun Hannity’s opinion of the the republican candidate’s debate on December 15, 2011. Ingraham was her typical insulting self. She made a derogatory comment about Bachmann and tried to cover her comment by stating that Bachmann looked pretty. Rush’s comment about it being a four person race I interpreted as fair. Hannity is stuck on the narrative that Romney and/or Gingrich are the only ones qualified to be president.

In my observation of the debate, I include irony. Am I to believe that the sins of our friends are not sins. In my opinion, it very evident that the reason for Romney and Gingrich’s flip-flops were and are motivated by money.

In a criticism of Donald Trump I heard a person attempt to explain that Mr. Trump “greased” the palms of democrats in order to get his developments built. This is unethical and immoral no matter who does it. Such immoral and unethical behavior is not undesirable of the a US president.

The question is being asked of the candidate’s if they will endorse the republican nominee. Let me say I will not endorse, Perry, Romney, and Gingrich because I will not have anything to do with people with poor morality and poor ethics.

When both of these men were swimming in the liberal pond, they knew exactly what they were doing it and why they were doing it. It was nothing more than personal ambition. I would like the president of the United States of America to be motivated by something more than personal ambition.

Furthermore, the ones on trial in this election are the American voters. This election is about who the American voter is in the present. People say to follow the money. I say observe the attitudes of the members of a society.

In my opinion, it is petty to support a candidate just for the sake of wanting to be right. In my last article and video essay on USTREAM, I went over the criteria I use to evaluate a candidate for US president and republican nominee. One of my criteria is moral character.

However, I find it hard to believe people want to pretend that Perry, Romney, and Gingrich’s past is not what is documented. Perry started as a democrat. Perry ran Al Gore’s presidential campaign. Perry supports in-state college tuition for “illegal aliens”. Perry thought it was a good idea to force medical procedures on teen girls.

Romney was for abortion. Romney is for a healthcare mandate. Romney stated he did not want to return to Reagan-Bush. Romney praised Obama’s stimulus and then criticized it. Romney praised TARP and then criticized it. Romney supported “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. Then he opposed it.

Gingrich did a commercial with a liberal, espousing global warming. Gingrich spoke in support of “cap and trade”. Gingrich took money to represent the values of Fannie and Freddie Mac to republicans in congress. Gingrich in 2010 supported the republican party’s candidate for senator over a true conservative.

I have no problem with personal ambition. I would like that people who will do anything to get elected, not be rewarded by conservatives.

One candidate was right last night when he said America has a crisis of confidence. Politicians have lied to Americans for a very long time. Liars, scam artist, and defrauders should not be president. However, lack of involvement by citizens is the reason many politicians think they can be two-faced.

Let us identify our goals. We want government spending to be greatly reduced. We want taxes to be lowered. We want unreasonable government regulation to stop. We want every enemy of Americans to be hunted down and stopped.

Now, what have been our obstacles to these goals. I am going to suggest that petty political games interfere with National Security. In fact petty ambitious politicians are obstacles to all these goals.

However, politicians only do what the citizens allow them to do in life. I am some what encouraged by the level of citizen involvement I have seen since the election of Barack Hussein Obama.

I am concerned about the emotionalism of some people in relation to politics. This is the only way I can explain the flirtations conservatives have had with Trump, Perry, Cain, and now Gingrich. The inconsistencies of these candidates we have all known about since the beginning.

What is the difference today? Are we so afraid of Obama, we cannot think straight? I guess people are suffering from Obama-dementia; eradicate and unexplainable behavior due to fear of Barack Hussein Obama.

Look conservatives. A white and orange cat from my neighborhood froze to death while sleeping. No one has bothered to do anything with his corpse. I don’t even believe people are aware that he passed.

Well, that dead cat’s corpse could beat Obama in the next presidential election. Conservatives are done with Obama. Independents and cool-aid drinking liberals are also done with Obama.

Ninety five percent of Americans did not get a tax cut. He did not close the US prison in Guantanamo Bay Cuba. He did not give civil trials to terrorist. His one and a half trillion stimulus did not stimulate anything. Unemployment is at 8.6%. Unemployment dropped because people stopped looking for work. All Obama can say is tax the rich.

Therefore, I do not care how good Obama is at speaking. He will not be reelected.

The title of this article is Fighting the corruption of the Human Soul: A Review of a Debate. Today, we are inhuman. Some dark force if pushing us down the river of life and we are too traumatized to question it.

I cannot believe that the unreasonable and petty will choose America’s next leader. As much as I respect the efforts of many TEA party members. I have not and will not join a TEA party chapter.

We need to remember principles of honor and integrity. We need to remember that us, who are fortunate enough to be within America’s border, have the responsibility of the human race in our hands. If we elect another convenient politician, we are just as immoral and unethical as they are in life.

I know that when Perry, Romney, and Gingrich try to look me in the eye to tell me they have changed they are lying to me. My education and life experiences inform me of this fact. It is my opinion, that these gentleman’s change in values is just because they have presidential ambitions.

We have to be better than them. We have to uphold greater standards. We have to be aware that:

People argue that it will help the economy by creating a legal and stable market for it. But let’s think about this. First, there’s the problem of who is going to oversee this? Next is how are we goign to start a national distribution and sales network that isn’t corrupted? Another is what’s legalizing and ‘moderating’ use really going to do to our economy?

Let’s look at this. There’s a famous song about this actually. I believe one of the lines is “I was gunna go to work… but then I got high”. So people say they can perform and function just fine while elevated, but is it true? no. I live around plenty of people who smoke and they’re the most unproductive bunch I have ever seen. Late to work, constantly sick, too lazy to do anything, no exercise, not much cleanliness, etc. Now I’m not saying every smoker is like this. Not at all. But a majority of them are from what I’ve seen.

What this will lead to is a nationwide decline in efficiency of just about everything. Now there’s also the factor of pricing, marketing, and all that jazz. Who’s going to determine that? Who is going to enforce the legal uses of it? Can we drive while high? ’cause I know that’s going to happen even if it’s not legal. Can I smoke if I’m only 16? ’cause I promise you that everyone who can get their hands on it will use it. No matter how old. All they’ll have to do is take on the practice used today of asking an older friend or family member.

Now comes the argument of ‘if alcohol is legal, why can’t weed be?’ Well that’s a good argument. People are very irresponsible with alcohol and its uses. However, if we legalize weed while keeping alcohol legal as well, we’re doubling that amount of dangerous substances that exist in the general public. If you are so adamant about having alcohol be illegal, then push for it like you are for having weed be legal. Same goes for cigarettes. In my world, if I were to choose how it goes, all three would be illegal and punishable by law. Heavily punishable. They’re all equally as bad to me. Call me ignorant all you want. But this is my view.

And we all know that if you give a mouse a cookie, he’s going to ask for a glass of milk.

As usual, please leave comments, arguments, etc.

Best regards,

Andy

Image via Wikipedia

So, Trump is going to have his own little debate.  Once he announced that he wouldn’t be running to be the president, I thought that we had heard the last for Trump, but I was wrong.  He has yet again found another way to get himself in the news.

This is not a chance for the canidates to get the public on their sides.  They are going to get Donald Trump on their side.

People this won’t be a circus, this will be an ass kissing party.  You will only hear the canidates say what they think Trump wants them to say, because Trump will back up who he likes the most.

If Trump can’t be president and run this country, then he will pay someone to do it.  Somebody needs to put his ego in check.

I think ever since the last election everything has been a joke.  This is another year where our presidental election will not be taken seriously.

Very quickly, I am going to show you two facts, both coming from the Bible, that show the God is real. First off, the Bible states the Israel would once again become a nation. As many of you know, Israel became Palestine. However, Israel once again became a nation in this past century. So how did a Bible written thousands of years ago predict this? Secondly in the Revelation, the Bible predicts that the world will move towards, and eventually become, a single currency. There has already been meetings and discussions regarding such a coming. Here is irrefutable evidence showing the proof that God is real. 

Still not ready to believe? Well, maybe some reasoning will do. Many people believe in the theory of evolution, and with that theory, many people believe in how the world was made. People have come to believe that the world came to be through a single cell splitting over billions and trillions of years. Now tell me. How did this single cell split perfectly, and have so many mistakes in its DNA as to make the world we now live in so perfectly as it did today? You can look it up, the chance of that is something like one over ten, raised to the ten million. Or, you can simply believe that God made the Earth in 7 days…. Hmmm..

Still not ready? Ok, i mentioned evolution in the previous paragraph. So there are some of you that believe that we evolved over billions of years instead, and that through random mishaps in DNA, simple organisms turned into multi-cellular animals. Well…. that in itself sounds a little.. ‘fishy’ don’t you think? You would rather believe that we evolved from apes, instead of that God created us? 

Here is an example I heard a pastor use; I was talking to one of my friends today, and we were in a debate about God. So, out of the blue I said, “Hey, you see this car right here? This jeep? It just oozed up out of the ground.” The friend replied, “No it didn’t.” “Why not? Where did it come from?” “Well it came from a car dealership somewhere.” “Exactly,” the pastor said. “It is easier for you to believe that this car came from a source rather than appearing out of no where.” How is this example not perfect? Can you honestly tell yourself that God did not make everything, and just have faith in it? The car had to come from somewhere. The computer you are reading this on came from somewhere. We came from somewhere. The first cell came from somewhere. God is the answer to it all, and all He asks, is for you to believe.